[OASIS Issue Tracker] (XLIFF-9) Use (also) the normal ITS namespace in the ITSM module

[OASIS Issues Tracker <workgroup_mailer@lists.oasis-open.org>]

    [ https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/XLIFF-9?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=63971#comment-63971 ] 

Felix Sasaki commented on XLIFF-9:
----------------------------------

I agree with Yves. Further, one more aspect using ITS in other XML formats from https://www.w3.org/TR/xml-i18n-bp/#Modularization . In all these examples we have a situation like XLIFF: using the native ITS namespace cannot cover every aspect of the format, e.g. transclusion in DITA, external references to content in formats like DocBook or TEI, etc. But in the examples mostly for local markup the ITS namespace is used. The rationale is like in the last item Yves' list, cited and generalised below:

[
format-specific-namespace namespace + ITS processor + data categories without pointers ==> NOT OK 
ITS namespace + ITS processor + data categories without pointers ==> OK 
One difference: ITS better in this case. 
]



> Use (also) the normal ITS namespace in the ITSM module
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: XLIFF-9
>                 URL: https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/XLIFF-9
>             Project: OASIS XML Localisation Interchange File Format (XLIFF) TC
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>          Components: ITS Module
>    Affects Versions: 2.1_csprd01
>         Environment: https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xliff-comment/201610/msg00020.html
>            Reporter: Yves Savourel
>            Assignee: Felix Sasaki
>              Labels: request_tc_discussion
>             Fix For: 2.1_csprd02
>
>
> Looking at the rules files for ITSM, we can see there are several data categories that cannot be mapped by rules because they do not
> have pointer attributes available.
> - Localization Quality Issues
> - Localization Quality Rating
> - Provenance
> - MT Confidence
> This means a pure ITS processor cannot process an XLIFF document and get any data for those data categories.
> This would be resolved if the namespace was ITS' rather than the ITSM (ITS Module) namespace.
> I believe we selected early on to go with ITSM even for the data categories defined from scratch because of the <sm/> case where the
> semantics need to be adjusted. Since, we establish (I think) that the <sm/> case is such that ITS processors cannot really resolve
> it anyway.
> In other words, the <sm/> case is hopeless if you are not an XLIFF processor, whether you use ITS or ITSM, and XLIFF processors do
> treat <sm/> in a special way in the case of ITSM. They could do the same for ITS.
> Hence, it seems all the data categories that ITSM implements 'from scratch' could be in the normal ITS namespace, and work for both
> XLIFF and ITS processors.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2.2#6258)